-
Journal of Neuro-oncology Aug 2023Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015 based on the randomized controlled EF-14 study. Subsequent approvals worldwide and increased adoption over time have raised the question of whether a consistent survival benefit has been observed in the real-world setting, and whether device usage has played a role.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search to identify clinical studies evaluating overall survival (OS) in TTFields-treated patients. Comparative and single-cohort studies were analyzed. Survival curves were pooled using a distribution-free random-effects method.
RESULTS
Among nine studies, seven (N = 1430 patients) compared the addition of TTFields therapy to standard of care (SOC) chemoradiotherapy versus SOC alone and were included in a pooled analysis for OS. Meta-analysis of comparative studies indicated a significant improvement in OS for patients receiving TTFields and SOC versus SOC alone (HR: 0.63; 95% CI 0.53-0.75; p < 0.001). Among real-world post-approval studies, the pooled median OS was 22.6 months (95% CI 17.6-41.2) for TTFields-treated patients, and 17.4 months (95% CI 14.4-21.6) for those not receiving TTFields. Rates of gross total resection were generally higher in the real-world setting, irrespective of TTFields use. Furthermore, for patients included in studies reporting data on device usage (N = 1015), an average usage rate of ≥ 75% was consistently associated with prolonged survival (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Meta-analysis of comparative TTFields studies suggests survival may be improved with the addition of TTFields to SOC for patients with newly diagnosed GBM.
Topics: Humans; Glioblastoma; Temozolomide; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Brain Neoplasms; Combined Modality Therapy
PubMed: 37493865
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-023-04348-w -
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Feb 2023Outcomes for patients with high-grade glioma remain poor. Temozolomide (TMZ) is the only drug approved for first-line treatment of glioblastoma multiforme, the most... (Review)
Review
Outcomes for patients with high-grade glioma remain poor. Temozolomide (TMZ) is the only drug approved for first-line treatment of glioblastoma multiforme, the most aggressive form of glioma. Chronotherapy highlights the potential benefit of timed TMZ administration. This is based on pre-clinical studies of enhanced TMZ-induced glioma cytotoxicity dependent on circadian, oscillating expression of key genes involved in apoptosis, DNA damage repair, and cell-cycle mediated cell death. The current systematic review's primary aim was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of TMZ chronotherapy. A systemic review of literature following PRISMA guidelines looking at clinical outcomes on TMZ chronotherapy on gliomas was performed. The search in the English language included three databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane) and five conferences from 1946 to April 2022. Two independent reviewers undertook screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment. A descriptive analysis was conducted due to limited data. Of the 269 articles screened, two unique studies were eligible and underwent abstraction for survival and toxicity findings. Both studies-one a retrospective cohort study (n = 166) and the other a prospective randomized feasibility study (n = 35)-were conducted by the same academic group and suggested a trend for improved overall survival, but possibly increased toxicity when TMZ was administered in the morning (vs. evening). There was limited evidence suggesting possible therapeutic value from administering TMZ in the morning, which may be consistent with the pre-clinical observations of the importance of the timing of TMZ administration in vitro. Larger, pragmatic, prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to ascertain the value of TMZ chronotherapy to provide optimized and equitable care for this population.
Topics: Humans; Temozolomide; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Brain Neoplasms; Glioma; Chronotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36826108
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30020147 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Dec 2023This systematic review updates the MASCC/ESMO recommendations for high-emetic-risk chemotherapy (HEC) published in 2016-2017. HEC still includes cisplatin, carmustine,...
PURPOSE
This systematic review updates the MASCC/ESMO recommendations for high-emetic-risk chemotherapy (HEC) published in 2016-2017. HEC still includes cisplatin, carmustine, dacarbazine, mechlorethamine, streptozocin, and cyclophosphamide in doses of > 1500 mg/m and the combination of cyclophosphamide and an anthracycline (AC) in women with breast cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review report following the PRISMA guidelines of the literature from January 1, 2015, until February 1, 2023, was performed. PubMed (Ovid), Scopus (Google), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched. The literature search was limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Forty-six new references were determined to be relevant. The main topics identified were (1) steroid-sparing regimens, (2) olanzapine-containing regimens, and (3) other issues such as comparisons of antiemetics of the same drug class, intravenous NK receptor antagonists, and potentially new antiemetics. Five updated recommendations are presented.
CONCLUSION
There is no need to prescribe steroids (dexamethasone) beyond day 1 after AC HEC, whereas a 4-day regimen is recommended in non-AC HEC. Olanzapine is now recommended as a fixed part of a four-drug prophylactic antiemetic regimen in both non-AC and AC HEC. No major differences between 5-HT receptor antagonists or between NK receptor antagonists were identified. No new antiemetic agents qualified for inclusion in the updated recommendations.
Topics: Female; Humans; Emetics; Antiemetics; Consensus; Olanzapine; Nausea; Vomiting; Antineoplastic Agents; Cyclophosphamide; Anthracyclines
PubMed: 38127246
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08221-4 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022Multiple treatments of unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma have been licensed in the adjuvant setting, causing tremendous interest in developing neoadjuvant...
Multiple treatments of unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma have been licensed in the adjuvant setting, causing tremendous interest in developing neoadjuvant strategies for melanoma. Eligible studies included those that compared overall survival/progression-free survival/grade 3 or 4 adverse events in patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma. Seven eligible randomized trials with nine publications were included in this study. Direct and network meta-analysis consistently indicated that nivolumab+ipilimumab, nivolumab, and trametinib could significantly improve overall survival and progression-free survival compared to ipilimumab in advanced melanoma patients. Compared to ipilimumab, nivolumab, dacarbazine, and ipilimumab+gp100 had a reduced risk of grade 3/4 adverse reactions. The nivolumab+ipilimumab combination had the highest risk of adverse events, followed by ipilimumab+dacarbazine and trametinib. Combination therapy was more beneficial to improve overall survival and progression-free survival than monotherapy in advanced melanoma treatment, albeit at the cost of increased toxicity. Regarding the overall survival/progression-free survival, ipilimumab+gp100 ranked below ipilimumab+dacarbazine and nivolumab+ipilimumab, although it had a smaller rate of grade 3 or 4 AEs than other treatments (except nivolumab). Nivolumab is the optimum adjuvant treatment for unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma with a good risk-benefit profile. In order to choose the best therapy, clinicians must consider the efficacy, adverse events, and physical status.
PubMed: 35785213
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.926242 -
Neurology India 2022Seizures often herald the clinical appearance of glioma. Temozolomide (TMZ) is the first-line chemotherapeutic agent that has been used to treat glioma. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Seizures often herald the clinical appearance of glioma. Temozolomide (TMZ) is the first-line chemotherapeutic agent that has been used to treat glioma.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic review to determine seizure outcomes in glioma patients treated with TMZ.
METHODS AND MATERIAL
We searched EMBASE and PubMed databases (January 1, 2003-August 26, 2021) by using search terms closely related to glioma, seizure, and temozolomide. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened and selected using previously established inclusion and exclusion criteria. The research team members reviewed potential articles and reached a consensus on the final articles to be included.
RESULTS
Nine studies containing data from three continents met our inclusion criteria. From several descriptive studies on low-grade gliomas (LGGs), the percentage of patients with partial seizure control after TMZ treatment ranged from 29% to 89.7%, and the percentage of patients with complete seizure control after TMZ ranged from 19.4% to 72%. In a retrospective cohort study of patients with LGGs, there was a marked difference in decreased seizure frequency between patients receiving TMZ and those who did not receive TMZ. In a randomized trial, TMZ seemed to have little effect on seizure control in elderly patients with glioblastoma.
CONCLUSIONS
At present, there are few high-quality and well-designed clinical studies on TMZ for gliomas-related seizures. In terms of the literature included in this review, TMZ has an inhibitory effect on epilepsy. More randomized controlled trials are needed to elucidate the clinical benefits of TMZ in the treatment of gliomas-related seizures.
Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Brain Neoplasms; Glioma; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Seizures; Temozolomide
PubMed: 35864610
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.349588 -
International Journal of Molecular... Nov 2023Gliomas are aggressive malignant brain tumors, with poor prognosis despite available therapies, raising the necessity for finding new compounds with therapeutic action.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Gliomas are aggressive malignant brain tumors, with poor prognosis despite available therapies, raising the necessity for finding new compounds with therapeutic action. Numerous preclinical investigations evaluating resveratrol's anti-tumor impact in animal models of glioma have been reported; however, the variety of experimental circumstances and results have prevented conclusive findings about resveratrol's effectiveness. Several databases were searched during May 2023, ten publications were identified, satisfying the inclusion criteria, that assess the effects of resveratrol in murine glioma-bearing xenografts. To determine the efficacy of resveratrol, tumor volume and animal counts were retrieved, and the data were then subjected to a random effects meta-analysis. The influence of different experimental conditions and publication bias on resveratrol efficacy were evaluated. Comparing treated to untreated groups, resveratrol administration decreased the tumor volume. Overall, the effect's weighted standardized difference in means was -2.046 (95%CI: -3.156 to -0.936; -value < 0.001). The efficacy of the treatment was observed for animals inoculated with both human glioblastoma or rat glioma cells and for different modes of resveratrol administration. The combined administration of resveratrol and temozolomide was more effective than temozolomide alone. Reducing publication bias did not change the effectiveness of resveratrol treatment. The findings suggest that resveratrol slows the development of tumors in animal glioma models.
Topics: Humans; Rats; Mice; Animals; Temozolomide; Resveratrol; Cell Line, Tumor; Glioma; Brain Neoplasms; Models, Animal
PubMed: 38068922
DOI: 10.3390/ijms242316597 -
Neurology India 2022Different variant of GBM has been reported viz. Epithelioid Glioblastoma (GBM-E), Rhabdoid GBM (GBM-R), Small cell GBM (GBM-SC), Giant cell GBM (GBM-GC), GBM with neuro...
OBJECTIVES
Different variant of GBM has been reported viz. Epithelioid Glioblastoma (GBM-E), Rhabdoid GBM (GBM-R), Small cell GBM (GBM-SC), Giant cell GBM (GBM-GC), GBM with neuro ectodermal differentiation (GBM-PNET) with unknown behavior.
MATERIALS
We conducted a systematic review and individual patient data analysis of these rare GBM variants. We searched PubMed, google search, and Cochrane library for eligible studies till July 1 2016 published in English language and collected data regarding age, sex, subtype and treatment received, Progression Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS). Statistical Package for social sciences (SPSS) v16 software was used for all statistical analysis.
RESULTS
We retrieved data of 196 patients with rare GBM subtypes. Among these GBM-GC is commonest (51%), followed by GBM-R (19%), GBM-PNET (13%), GBM-SC (9%) and GBM-E (8%). Median age at diagnosis was 38, 40, 43.5, 69.5 and 18 years, respectively. Male: female ratio was 2:1 for GBM-E, and 1:3 for GBM-SC. Maximal safe resection followed by adjuvant local radiation was used for most of the patients. However, 6 patients with GBM-PNET, 3 each of GBM-E, GBM-SC received adjuvant craniospinal radiation. Out of 88 patients who received chemotherapy, 64 received Temozolomide alone or combination chemotherapy containing Temozolomide. Median PFS and OS for the entire cohort were 9 and 16 months. In univariate analysis, patient with a Gross Total Resection had significantly better PFS and OS compared to those with a Sub Total Resection [23 vs. 13 months (p-0.01)]. Median OS for GBM PNET, GBM-GC, GBM-SC, GBM-R and GBM-E were 32, 18.3, 11, 12 and 7.7 months, respectively (P = 0.001). Interestingly, 31.3%, 37.8% of patients with GBM-E, GBM-R had CSF dissemination.
CONCLUSION
Overall cohort of rarer GBM variant has equivalent survival compared to GBM not otherwise specified. However, epithelioid and Rhabdoid GBM has worst survival and one third shows CSF dissemination.
Topics: Humans; Male; Female; Glioblastoma; Temozolomide; Data Analysis; Brain Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Neuroectodermal Tumors, Primitive; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating
PubMed: 36352613
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.359222 -
Journal of Controlled Release :... Sep 2022Gliomas are the deadliest of all primary brain tumors, and they constitute a serious global health problem. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are gene expression regulators associated... (Review)
Review
Gliomas are the deadliest of all primary brain tumors, and they constitute a serious global health problem. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are gene expression regulators associated with glioma pathogenesis. Thus, miRNAs represent potential therapeutic agents for treating gliomas. However, miRNAs have not been established as part of the regular clinical armamentarium. This systemic review evaluates current molecular and pre-clinical studies with the aim of defining the most appealing supramolecular platform for administering therapeutic miRNA to patients with gliomas. An integrated analysis suggested that cationic lipid nanoparticles, functionalized with octa-arginine peptides, represent a potentially specific, practical, non-invasive intervention for treating gliomas. This supramolecular platform allows loading both hydrophilic (miRNA) and hydrophobic (anti-tumor drugs, like temozolomide) molecules. This systemic review is the first to describe miRNA delivery systems targeted to gliomas that integrate several types of molecules as active ingredients. Further experimental validation is warranted to confirm the practical value of miRNA delivery systems.
Topics: Arginine; Brain Neoplasms; Glioma; Humans; Liposomes; MicroRNAs; Nanoparticles; Peptides; Temozolomide
PubMed: 35905783
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2022.07.027 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Malignant melanoma is a highly aggressive cancer that spreads and metastasizes quickly. In recent years, the antiangiogenic drug bevacizumab has been trialed to treat...
Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in patients with malignant melanoma: a systematic review and PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-comparative clinical studies.
Malignant melanoma is a highly aggressive cancer that spreads and metastasizes quickly. In recent years, the antiangiogenic drug bevacizumab has been trialed to treat malignant melanoma. We conducted the first meta-analysis to examine the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab combined with other drugs in malignant melanoma. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-comparative clinical studies of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy, targeted medicine, and interferon to treat malignant melanoma in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Meta-analysis of RCT was performed using Review Manager (version 5.4), and non-comparative meta-analysis was performed using R (version 4.0.3). The primary outcome was the objective response rate. Depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies, the pooled outcomes and 95% CI were calculated using either random-effects or fixed-effect models. Subgroup outcomes were calculated with possible relevant variables. Sensitivity analyses were carried out by excluding each study from the highly heterogeneous pooled results in turn. Funnel plot and Begg's test were used to test the included studies' potential publication bias. The level of significance was set at < 0.05. This meta-analysis included 20 trials: five RCTs and 15 non-comparative clinical studies with a total of 23 bevacizumab intervention arms. In 14 treatment arms, bevacizumab was combined with chemotherapy drugs such as fotemustine, dacarbazine, carboplatin/paclitaxel, and temozolomide. In six treatment arms, bevacizumab was combined with targeted medicines such as imatinib, everolimus, sorafenib, erlotinib, and temsirolimus. There were also six treatment arms that used bevacizumab in combination with interferon. The pooled objective response rate was 15.8% (95% CI, 11.4%-20.2%). Bevacizumab plus carboplatin/paclitaxel significantly increased the overall survival compared to carboplatin/paclitaxel (HR = 0.64, 95% CI, 0.49-0.85, < 0.01). Fatigue, nausea, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were the most common adverse events. The pooled incidence of hypertension of all bevacizumab arms in malignant melanoma was 32.4% (95% CI, 24.5%-40.3%). This study showed that bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy might be effective and well-tolerated in patients with stage III or IV unresectable malignant melanoma. : [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=304625], identifier [CRD42022304625].
PubMed: 37521468
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1163805 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2020Since 2011, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been effective treatment options for advanced melanoma. Little is known about how risks of immune-related adverse... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Since 2011, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been effective treatment options for advanced melanoma. Little is known about how risks of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) vary by ICIs.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the risk of irAEs across different treatment regimens for advanced melanoma using network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for all randomized clinical trial (RCT) articles published from January 1, 2010, through June 30, 2019.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies included phases 2 and 3 RCTs in the treatment of advanced melanoma that compared ICIs (ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) with chemotherapy drugs (eg, dacarbazine, carboplatin, and paclitaxel) or different ICI regimens.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Different treatment regimens were compared using bayesian network meta-analysis with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation with noninformative prior distribution and random-effects generalized linear models.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcomes were the cumulative incidence of any irAEs (regardless of severity) and severe irAEs (grades 3-5). Based on the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals (95% CrI), the probability of being associated with the lowest irAE risks was estimated for each treatment regimen.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs with 8 different treatment regimens for advanced melanoma and involving a total of 5051 patients were included. Overall, the 3 ICI treatment regimens associated with the lowest risk of any or severe irAEs were pembrolizumab, 2 mg/kg, every 3 weeks; nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks; and pembrolizumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks. Compared with ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks, only nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks, was associated with a decreased risk for any irAEs (OR, 0.34; 95% CrI, 0.13-0.94). A decreased risk for severe irAEs was observed for ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, every 3 weeks (OR, 0.35; 95% CrI, 0.14-0.74); pembrolizumab, 10 mg/kg, every 2 weeks (OR, 0.22; 95% CrI, 0.05-0.95) and 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks (OR, 0.20; 95% CrI, 0.06-0.68); and nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks (OR, 0.20; 95% CrI, 0.07-0.48) compared with ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks. An increased risk for severe irAEs was associated with nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, every 3 weeks combined with ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, every 3 weeks compared with other ICI regimens (ORs ranging from 4.09 [95% CrI, 1.73-10.99] to 7.40 [95% CrI, 1.12-49.29]) except ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings suggest that for patients with advanced melanoma at high risk of irAEs, pembrolizumab, 2 mg/kg, every 3 weeks, nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks, and pembrolizumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks may be the preferred treatment regimens (with respect to irAE risks) among the ICI regimens reported, whereas ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks alone and nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, every 3 weeks combined with ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, every 3 weeks should be used with caution. A network analysis may be valuable for clinical decision-making when evidence from head-to-head comparisons is lacking.
Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Humans; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 32211869
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1611